Thursday, January 22, 2009

Here.The mystery, literally, is why the fuck did we elect him---not once but twice, the second time after 9/11 and after his assault on people's rights and on Afghanistan and Iraq in a direct sense. It outlines in an almost painful way the key failings of Bush from the campaign in 2000 till the end.

My contribution to why exactly people did it are that on some level lots and lots of people identify with the sort of idiotic man's man cigar chomping back slapping good 'ole boys network type of guy that Bush represented. Ignorant about everything except how to make money, which is sometimes gotten by who you know, with greed and corruption flying high, the man's men mindset embodies much of the concept of the "Ugly American". We are in fact the "Ugly Americans", and a significant amount of us don't give a damn about the rest of the world, or civil rights, or human rights, or prisoner's rights, or (enemies) privacy rights, or legal arguments against starting wars with whoever the fuck we want to, on and on. It isn't some sort of flaw. That's how lots of people in the U.S. are. Bourbon drinking cretins. It's why we're in the economic crisis we're in, through the extrapolation of that ethic all across the economy, and why the world hates us. Bush is the both the natural outcome of this aspect of the capitalist system and a champion for all who are a part of it who aspire to some sort of 'greatness'.

From the article:

"Even on Inauguration Day 2009, as most Americans rejoice that Bush's disastrous presidency is finally heading into the history books, there should be reflection on how this catastrophe could have befallen the United States - and on who else was responsible.

Indeed, it may become one of the great historical mysteries, leaving future scholars to scratch their heads over how a leader with as few qualifications as George W. Bush came to lead the world's most powerful nation at the start of the 21st century.

How could a significant number of American voters have thought that an enterprise as vast and complicated as the U.S. government could be guided by a person who had failed at nearly every job he ever had, whose principal qualification was that his father, George H.W. Bush, was fondly remembered as having greater personal morality than Bill Clinton?

Why did so many Americans think that a little-traveled, incurious and inarticulate man of privilege could lead the United States in a world of daunting challenges, shifting dangers and sharpening competition?

What had transformed American politics so much that, for many Americans, personal trivia, like Al Gore's earth-tone sweaters, trumped serious policy debates, like global warming, health care for citizens, prudent fiscal policies and a responsible foreign policy? How could George W. Bush, who was born with a shiny silver spoon in his mouth, sell himself as a populist everyman?

Even taking into account the controversial outcome of Election 2000 - which saw Gore win more votes than Bush - why was the margin close enough so Bush could snatch the White House away with the help of five Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court?

And why did the nation - after the 9/11 attacks - so willingly follow Bush into a radical divergence from traditional U.S. foreign policy and into violations of longstanding national principles of inalienable rights and the rule of law?

Why did the institutions designed to protect U.S. constitutional liberties, including the press and Congress, crumble so readily, allowing Bush to seize so much power that he could entangle the United States in an aggressive - and costly - war in Iraq with few questions asked?"